The Gendered Effects of a Graduated Sanctions Model on Probation Outcomes in Kansas

• Published date: 01 May 2022
• Date: 01 May 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/08874034221080188
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034221080188

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2022, Vol. 33(4) 373 –398

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/08874034221080188

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

The Gendered Effects

of a Graduated Sanctions

Model on Probation

Outcomes in Kansas

George E. Browne1, Lisa Melander1,

Breanna Boppre2, and Mari-Esther Edwards1

Abstract

Although originally perceived as an evidence-based program, there has been a

continual debate on the true effectiveness of the graduated sanctions model for

probation. Nonetheless, what is missing in the literature is an examination of how

this program may affect women under supervision differently than men. Utilizing

probation violation hearing data from the Kansas Sentencing Commission (KSSC), this

study examines the impact of Kansas’ 2013 House Bill 2170 (HB 2170) on probation

outcomes across gender. Results indicate that the use of graduated sanctions scheme

through HB 2170 is associated with a higher likelihood of receiving an imprisonment

disposition for women probation technical violators than men. Major findings and

policy implications will be discussed.

Keywords

correctional policy, sanctions, gender bias

Since the 1970s, the U.S. criminal justice system has undergone an era of “mass incar-

ceration” (Alexander, 2012, p. 6). The United States has the largest prison population

and the highest per-capita incarceration rate with 1 in every 110 people incarcerated

(Glaze & Kaeble, 2018; Liptak, 2008). Nonetheless, the majority of persons involved

in the criminal justice system are under community corrections supervision (probation

1Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA

2Wichita State University, KS, USA

Corresponding Author:

George E. Browne, Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work, Kansas State University,

1603 Old Claflin Place, Manhattan, KS 66506, USA.

Email: Gebrowne@ksu.edu

1080188CJPXXX10.1177/08874034221080188Criminal Justice Policy ReviewBrowne et al.

research-article2022

374 Criminal Justice Policy Review 33(4)

or parole). In fact, research has shown that 68% of the 6,000,000 people in the criminal

justice system are under community supervision, while the remaining 32% are incar-

cerated (Glaze & Kaeble, 2018). This equates to 1 in every 31 adults in the United

States on probation or parole (Pew Charitable Trusts, 2009). Hence, scholars suggest

the United States is now entering an era of “mass probation” due to increases in the

number of persons under community supervision as well (Phelps, 2017, p. 54).

By design, probation was created to serve as a viable alternative to prison. Instead

of incarceration following a criminal conviction, those on probation are permitted to

remain in the community under structured supervision (Stohr & Walsh, 2015). As a

stipulation of this supervision, clients must refrain from committing any new crimes

or technical violations. Technical violations refer to the breaking of established rules

of supervision such as using drugs and/or alcohol, failing to maintain employment, or

missing appointments with their assigned probation officer (M. Jones & Kerbs, 2007).

Depending on the violation, the response from probation officers or the court can

range from community-based sanctions (e.g., extension of supervision term or more

frequent urine analyses) to revocation to prison.

The use of graduated sanctions has been proposed as a way to improve account-

ability and reduce the number of revocations for technical violations (Taxman et al.,

1999). Graduated sanctions refers to a correctional practice whereby short incremental

periods of incarceration are administered for noncompliance with community correc-

tions supervision rules (Hawken et al., 2016). As of recently, a number of states,

including Kansas, have implemented these policies (E. G. Browne, 2015; Pearsall,

2014). Although some research touts the success of these programs, which has included

improved compliance with probation conditions (Hawken, 2010; Hawken & Kleiman,

2009), others have not found the same benefits (Cullen et al., 2016; Duriez et al., 2014;

Shannon et al., 2015).

Moreover, little attention has been devoted to understanding gender differences in

outcomes related to graduated sanctions. While the U.S. correctional population has

increased substantially, the rate of women incarcerated has increased at a rate double that

of men since 1980 (U.S. Sentencing Project, 2018). Prior literature indicates that the

increase in women’s imprisonment is largely due to the rise in punitive sentencing poli-

cies targeting low-level offenses, which are the offense types most commonly commit-

ted by women (Boppre & Harmon, 2017; Chesney-Lind & Pasko, 2013). Thus, the

purpose of this study is to examine whether the graduated sanctions model in Kansas has

a differential impact on imprisonment dispositions (i.e., revocations resulting in incar-

ceration) across gender. The results not only contribute to the growing research on grad-

uated sanctions programs but also provide implications for gender-responsive policies.

Graduated Sanctions

Theoretical Foundation

A major foundation of the U.S. correctional system is deterrence theory (for a review,

see Cullen & Jonson, 2016). Deterrence-based strategies seek to prevent future law-

breaking acts through the threat of punishment. According to the theory, general